No. 87

My dear Brethren: Grace and peace through our Beloved Master!

On pp. 113-117 of this July-August 1962 paper No. 45 of J. W. Krewson there is further “profusion of words” containing many falsehoods on this subject; and on p. 115, par. 2, he describes as a “rash statement” our comment that “nowhere does the Bible give even a hint about how we should arrive at Nisan 1.” We quote a similar 'rash statement' by Brother Johnson: “While the Herald conceals the fact that the Jewish calendar is frequently out of harmony with its rule for Nisan 1, its main plea is that we must follow the Jewish calendar, because, they say, it is Scriptural and logical. On this point we take issue and make the following objections (the same kind of objections we offered against J. W. Krewson for similar claims–JJH): (1) The Bible nowhere states definitely the method of calculating the beginning of Nisan or any other month, much less the arbitrary method of the Jewish calendar.” Feb. 1933 P.T., p. 30, col, 1 – Please see for verification of this quotation from Brother Johnson. We now wonder if J. W. Krewson read our quotation from Brother Johnson: “The Bible nowhere states definitely the method of calculating the beginning of Nisan,” etc. in our July paper, p. 2, par. 4? Does he contend that Brother Johnson also made a “rash statement”? And this statement by Brother Johnson is to be found in the identical P.T. from which J. W. Krewson quotes!

And when he quotes in the same paragraph from P.T. 1933, p. 27, col. 1,2, respecting the testimony of the 2520 and 1845-year parallels, it seems here again he's read something which he doesn't even yet understand (much the same as his con­fusion on “Truth needing no defense” and on Brother Johnson's appointment of Epiphany Pilgrims, etc.). Up to 1933 Brother Johnson himself was under the incor­rect belief that the new month began the evening after the moon news; and it was not until 1933 that Brother Johnson realized it begins at six p.m. the evening before it news. To elucidate: If the moon came new at 10:06 p.m. April 4 (as it did in 1962), the custom had been to begin Nisan 1 at six p.m. April 5; and it was not until 1933 that Brother Johnson came to see the truth – that Nisan 1 should begin at six p.m. April 4, if the moon newed during that day. Therefore, Brother Johnson's calculation had only to do with the first day of the month – ­any month, whether that be Nisan or any other month – and it is to that extent ­and to that extent only – that the parallels influence the Passover date, or any other Biblical dates. It still does not inform us how to determine which moon should be the Nisan moon.

When J. W. Krewson says the statement by Brother Johnson “never before the Vernal Equinox” is a quotation from Josephus, this is just another of his brazen' falsehoods, as well as an idiotic one – because it would be a simple matter for the brethren to verify the fact that Josephus did not say it by referring to Josephus' Antiquities, Book III, Chap. 10, sec. 5, to which Brother Johnson re­ferred (the statement made by Brother Johnson being his own conclusion, based upon Josephus' statement regarding the month Nisan being synonymous with Aries in Jesus' day). Therefore, we have simply quoted Brother Johnson in this matter-­not in any effort to justify self, but to offer a clear presentation of the Truth on the subject.

Therefore, when J. W. Krewson says our source of information “must be Satan and the fallen angels,” he is in effect directing that very same attack upon Bro. Johnson. We ask J. W. Krewson the simple question: Did he go to sources outside the Bible to determine the Nisan moon this year, or did he learn that from some­where in the Bible itself? (And we wonder whether this “Pastor and Teacher” knows that the real Pastors and Teachers used “authenticated secular history” for chrono­logy not recorded in the Bible – “reliable dates of the Christian era, and several centuries before it” ?) Will he answer this question, or will he just offer another five pages of “words to no profit,” adding falsehood to falsehood – just as his “cousin” (R. G. Jolly) does when faced with the Truth in refutation of his errors? In fact, were it not for Josephus, and other non-Biblical recordings, we would have no way whatever of knowing that Nisan should not substantially cor­respond with our own January, which begins our year. Thus, J. W. Krewson's remarks here are simply some more of his nonsense – the kind of nonsense that usually DOES COME from “Satan and the fallen angels” (probably the same source the “cousins” received their Pyramid calculations to prove their errors). Brother Johnson accepted Josephus' statement in Antiquities, Book III, to which he referred, but did not quote. even as we ourselves accept it as New Testament procedure.

On his last par. of p. 116 J. W. Krewson attempts to belittle our quotation offered by Brother Johnson (re Josephus' statement), that the Jewish rule in Jesus' day required the Passover to be kept within a month after, but never before­ the Vernal Equinox. Here again J. W. Krewson apparently just reads without under­standing; because Brother Johnson refers to the same Josephus (although he does not quote him verbatim) to prove that in Jesus' day the “sun must be in Aries” when the Passover is kept. See Parousia Vol.Six, p. 734 – Brother Johnson's note.

And, if the foregoing is not enough, we now call upon J. W. Krewson to pro­duce one instance during the entire Parousia-Epiphany period when either Star Member ever observed the Memorial before the Vernal Equinox.

Right at the outset in 1955 (when he first presented himself as “Pastor and Teacher” to the brethren in general) we became aware of J. W. Krewson's limited education, as was so clearly revealed in his writings, grammar, etc. Although R. G. Jolly openly made mention of this defect, we ourselves kept silent; realizing that most of the Apostles were “ignorant and unlearned men,” and that scholastic attainment is not an essential to correct Biblical interpretation (although we all know that the Apostle Paul was 'chief' of the Apostles, and had more secular knowledge, which he faithfully used in the Lord's service – hence had many priv­ileges not bestowed on others just as faithful, but without his education); therefore, it would require more than grammatical ineptitude to condemn his pre­sentations. (However, as to the Apostles, we know from the records that they were men of solid judgment and intellectual ability – they had the rarest of gifts, innate intelligence, to which was added the “spirit of understanding” inherent in the ''Wisdom from Above,” and which is self-evidently so sadly lacking in J. W. Krewson). But it is now clearly evident that he is not even able to read plain English lit­erature, and understand what he has read after he reads it. Clearly enough, he often hears a bell ringing somewhere, but he is unable to locate the bell. He had our August paper No. 85 in plenty of time to read our quotation from E:7-366 from Brother Johnson – the Passover must be kept in the Spring. (His No. 45 did not reach us until August 18)... That book was published in 1938 – five years after the quotations now offered by J. W. Krewson. Why was he completely silent on this latest expression by the Epiphany Messenger. Again we ask, WHY?

It seems apropos to refer here to J. W. Krewson's statement at the top of p. 115: ''The celebration of the Memorial being a Little Flock developing Truth (P. vol. 6, pp. 457-484), the Lord used Brother Russell to establish the proper rule for determining the annual date (emphasis ours) for its celebration. But Brother Johnson says in Feb. 1933 Present Truth that such proper rule was not even given to him until the year 1933, from which we quote:

But, beloved, God is no stinful Giver (Jas. 1:5). When He gives He gives liberally; and in this gift of Truth He has given us more Truth than is above indicated. He has finally given us the correct way of finding out the Memorial date. Our Pastor had great difficulty in this matter, and, so far as we can make out from his varied methods, he sometimes used the full-moon day, sometimes the Jewish calendar, sometimes the method we have hitherto advocated (1800 E.L.), sometimes the U.S. Eastern Standard Time, and sometimes, disregarding all four of these, he used we know not just what method. In 1905, perplexed by these various methods, he even advocated giving up Nisan 14 altogether and taking instead the nominal church date – the eve of Good Friday. And during the Epiphany various groups of the Lord's people have used all five of these ways and have quoted him in approval, By showing us the real beginning of the lunar month as He regards it, God indicates that none of us has been on the right track; and He also thus points out to us additional Truth.” (Feb. 1, 1933 P.T., p. 24, col. 2, par. 3)

And we quote further on this subject from Brother Johnson: “This experience is another evidence that the Lord's mouthpiece priests are not infallible; but when the Truth is due the Lord, graciously pardoning past errors, lovingly uses them to announce it. How could He continue to use them as such mouthpieces, if they did not gladly humble themselves, acknowledge their shortcomings and be glad to anounce the advancing light? (This is the attitude of the real Pastors and teachers! – JJH.... We thank God that as a part of the mother of the daughter we have been cleansed from another item of error and are being sanctified by another item of advancing Truth (the error from which Brother Johnson was cleansed was the previous incorrect method of deriving Nisan 1–JJH). May the same bless­ing be the privilege of all God's Israel as they serve the Truth.” (p. 25 of same P.T., top of page) These quotations were taken from an article under the heading of “A Correction,” pp. 23-25.

J. W,Krewson says he is not offering his present attack to benefit his readers (they don't need it!); he's just doing it “in the interest of our supporters.” It is our fervent hope that at least some of his readers understand this subject better than he does! His brazen and ignorant exposition causes us to wonder if he has accepted the slogan of a certain criminal element in America: “Follow bold­ness with more boldness.” This technique he repeatedly follows – just as he is also now doing with R. G. Jolly in connection with 1 Cor. 6:6; so we are left to wonder if J. W. Krewson is now really, honestly trying to enlighten our readers, or whether he is attempting a cheap and bungling ruse to bamboozle his own supporters.

How timely in this instance are the words of the Wise Man in Prov. 19:23; 22:28 and 19:27: “The fear of the Lord tendeth to life: and he that hath it shall abide satisfied; he shall not be visited with evil.” Therefore, all of us should earnestly ponder, “Remove not the ancient landmarks, which thy (spiritual) fathers have set (those teachings explained when due for us especially by the last two Principal Men). Cease, my son, to hear the instruction that causeth to err from, the words of knowledge.” And “With all thy getting, get understanding.”

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgram

----------------------------------------------

Letter of General Interest

[Received too late to go in our original Sept. 1 article]

Dear Brother and Sister Hoefle: Greetings in the Master's Name!

I have, dear Brother, received the three bound volumes you sent to us, with much thanks and appreciation. They are to us what we read in Mal. 3:10. When I read Article No. 1 re correspondence with certain brethren in high places, I was shocked! I will not comment further on that at this time.

Now, re Brother Jolly's Tropics Trip, he stated in the Present Truth of May­ June 1962, p. 46, col. 2, under the heading “Editor's Tropics Trip,” par, 1, 3rd line: “We spoke on various subjects connected with self-examination, 1 Cor. 11:28-34, in purging out of the leaven of false doctrine of malice and wickedness.” Yes, he did 'Preach' those things to us, but at the same time his heart was full of malice and wickedness, and well needed the purging out of the leaven of false doctrine – ­such as Epiphany Consecrated Campers, teachings contrary to Brother Johnson and Brother Russell. According to St. Paul in Rom. 2:21-22 – Thou therefore, which teachest another, teachest not thyself? Thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? (v. 22) Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? Thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? And, after citing other Scriptures, R. G. Jolly said, “Preparatory to the Memorial, this is much needed, especially because one of your elders, whose name we need not men­tion here, for we would spare him.” The idea he, Brother Jolly, would spare Brother Roach! Just another one of his techniques, for he has good reasons for not mention­ing names. You see, Brother Roach is too well known by the brethren in the West Indies. He knows if he mentioned his name some of these brethren would write to Brother Roach, asking questions. R. G. Jolly doesn't want to be exposed! He said it was Brother Roach who made the division of the Ecclesia in Trinidad. That is not so! It was actually R. G. Jolly himself that brought about the separation, after having developed a certain amount of hatred for Brother Roach, for he said Brother Roach sent Christian love to Brother and Sister Hoefle (Other representa­tives of R. G. Jolly have sent 'Brother and Sister Hoefle' Christian love also–JJH), his enemies – and that he had joined hands with the sifters. Because of that he dis­missed Brother Roach from being the representative of the L.H.M.M.! Knowing that was not sufficient for the friends to dis-esteem Brother Roach as their faithful elder, R. G. Jolly planned to write a letter to the Ecclesia to impress the brethren with the thought that Brother Roach was no longer fit to be an elder of the Class, since he had joined with the sifters, who, he said, was teaching errors. The letter was written in such a manner that it would undermine their confidence in him (Bro. Roach), if the truth were not made known to them. After the letter was read to the Class, I, being the Chairman at that meeting, got up and said: “I deplore the read­ing of such a letter to the Class, especially as we are now preparing for the Pass­over Memorial service.” I said further: “Such a letter would cause a separation of the Class” – (for while the Brother was reading the letter, tears were in the eyes of some of the brethren, as they saw at once the underlying evil motive behind the letter). He, R. G. Jolly, was glad to use the same opportunity to come down here to deeper impress into the minds of the friends the 'unfitness' of Brother Roach to serve them as their Elder – and he did succeed in some measure.

His hatred further manifested itself when on his return trip he had to stop at the Airport in Trinidad, where a brother who has a similar hatred for Brother Roach, traveled about twelve miles to meet Brother Jolly to seek advice from him – how to put a case before the Class to remove Brother Roach from the eldership, because, he said, Brother Roach had violated a principle by keeping a separate Memorial ser­vice; and so he (R.G.Jolly) was able to give him the advice he wanted. As Bro. Roach was down on the program to conduct a Berean Study, he (R.G.Jolly) advised the Brother to get the elders to hold an emergency meeting so as to prevent Bro. Roach from conducting such a study – until such time that he would ask forgiveness for keeping a separate Memorial service. (And this is the same R. G. Jolly who accuses faithful Brother Roach of 'clericalism!JJH)

At the meeting the supporters (of R. G. Jolly) behaved so inhuman that I thought it best two days later to go to Brother Robertson, the secretary, and tell him that due to the behavior of some of the brethren, I would have no further meetings held at my home under the name of the L.H.M.M., and that was the end of it. (Others in Trinidad followed this course, too–JJH)

Sister Martin and I send warm Christian love to yourself, Sister Hoefle and to Sister Wells and Sister Dunnagan and the other dear ones with you.